Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies, sorted by outcome domain and in descending order according to methodological quality

From: The effect of interventions anticipated to improve plantar intrinsic foot muscle strength on fall-related dynamic function in adults: a systematic review

   

Intervention

Outcomes

Study / Design

Methodo-logical quality

Study population gender: (male/female) age: mean ± sd

Type

Volume

Progression

Supervision

Adherence/attendance

Domain

Instruments and measures

Taddei et al. [39]

Randomized controlled trial

High

Long distance runners

IG (n = 14)

Gender: 5/9

Age: 41.9 ± 7.4 yr

CG (n = 14)

Gender: 9/5

Age: 41.6 ± 6.0 yr

I: Foot and ankle strength exercise program

C: stretching program

8 weeks

4 sessions

20–30 min

Customized, 3 levels (sitting, double leg, single leg stance)

Weekly supervised session

80.4% supervised sessions attended

 

Barefoot running analysis with 3D motion capture system and force plates:

Foot and ankle biomechanics

MLA ROMb and stiffness;

Ground reaction forces

GRF verticala and AP impulse at push-off.

Okamura et al. [40]

Randomized controlled trial

High

Pronated foot posture

IG (n = 10)

Gender: 1/9

Age: 19.7 ± 0.9 yr

CG (n = 10)

Gender: 2/8

Age: 20.2 ± 1.5 yr

I: Short-foot exercise program supported by electrical stimulation and EMG biofeedback

C: No intervention

8 weeks

3 sessions

3 sets

10 reps

5 s contraction

45 s rest between sets

Customized, 3 levels (sitting, double leg, single leg stance)

Initial 20-min training session, weekly supervised session

102.1% unsupervised sessions accomplished; 77.5% supervised sessions attended

 

Barefoot gait analysis with 3D motion capture system and force plates:

Foot and ankle biomechanics

Navicular dropa and corresponding moment in time;

Ground reaction forces

GRF (anterior, medial, verticalc) in second half of stance;

Spatiotemporal parameters

Stance phase duration.

Matsumoto et al. [58]

Pre-post intervention study

Low

n = 20

Gender: 10/10

Age: 20.0 ± 2.4 yr

I: Short-foot exercise program

4 weeks

# sessions NR

30 reps

5 s contraction

Fixed, 3 levels: wk. 1 – sitting

wk. 2 – double leg stance

wk. 3 to 4 – single leg stance

Initial 30-min training session

67.2% sessions accomplished

 

Barfoot gait analysis with 3D motion capture system and pressure plate:

Foot and ankle biomechanics

MLA compressiona, peak pressure per foot region, total plantar contact area;

Spatiotemporal parameters

Gait speed.

Lynn et al. [53]

Randomized controlled trial

High

IG (n = 8)

Gender: 3/5

Age: 23.7 ± 2.1

CG (n = 8)

Gender: 3/5

Age: 22.6 ± 1.7 yr

I: Short-foot exercise program

C: No intervention

4 weeks

daily

100 reps

5 s contraction

Fixed, 2 levels: week 1,2 – sitting

week 3,4 – double leg stance

Initial training session, weekly phone consult, extra instructional training session before week 3

NR

Dynamic balance

YBT mediolateral CoP excursion for dominant and non-dominantc stance leg

Lee and Choi [54]

Randomized controlled trial

Moderate

Chronic ankle instability

IG (n = 15)

Gender: 5/10

Age: 20.9 ± 1.1 yr

CG (n = 15)

Gender: 5/10

Age: 20.8 ± 0.9 yr

I: IFM strength exercise program

C: no intervention

6 weeks

3 sessions

3 blocks

4 sets

3–15 reps

3–20s contraction

Fixed, 3 levels:week 1,2 – sitting

week 3,4 – double leg stance

week 5,6 – single leg stance

Supervision, but not specified

NR

Dynamic balance

YBT composite reach distance normalized to leg length

Mulligan et al. [56]

Pre-post intervention study

Moderate

n = 21

Gender: 3/18

Age: 26.1 ± 3.7

Short-foot exercise program

4 weeks

daily

3 min

5 s contraction

Customized, 3 levels (sitting, double leg, single leg stance) + variations (vision, surface stability)

Initial 1-h training session

85.7% sessions accomplished

Dynamic balance

SEBT reach distance in five directions, among which mediala

Tudpor et al. [55]

Non-randomized controlled trial

Low

Diabetes

IG (n = 8)

Gender: 4/4

Age: 62.6 ± 0.4 yr

CG (n = 7)

Gender: 3/4

Age: 67.4 ± 0.5 yr

I: foot strength exercises + short-foot exercises

C: foot strength exercises

8 weeks

daily

IG

30 reps of foot exercises + 30 min SFE

CG

30 reps of foot exercises

No progression, sitting position

 NR

NR

Dynamic balance

SEBT reach distance normalized to leg length in eight directions, among which laterala

Lee et al. [57]

Pre-post intervention study

Low

Chronic ankle instability (n = 15)

Gender: 7/8

Age: 21.5 ± 2.5 yr

Short-foot exercise program

8 weeks

3 sessions

3 sets

12 reps

5 s contraction

2 levels, fixed: week 1 to 4 – sitting

weeks 5 to 8 – single leg stance

 NR

NR

Dynamic balance

Moving platform: overall and medio-laterala center of gravity displacement index score

Ma et al. [61]

Pre-post intervention study

Low

Chronic ankle instability (n = 14)

Gender: 6/8

Age: 20.3 ± 1.5 yr

Short-foot exercise program + sham transcranial direct current stimulation

4 weeks

3 sessions

20 min

4 sets

3 levels (sitting, double leg, single leg stance)

All sessions were supervised

NR

Dynamic balance

YBT composite reach distance normalized to leg length

Kim et al. [59]

Pre-post intervention study

Low

Pronated foot function (n = 7)

Gender: 6/1

Age: 24.0 ± 1.9 yr

Short-foot exercise program

5 weeks

3 sessions

30 min

No progression, sitting position

Initial training session, all sessions were supervised

NR

Dynamic balance

YBT composite reach distance normalized to leg length

Pisal et al. [60]

Pre-post intervention study

Low

Pronated foot posture (n = 40)

Gender: NR

Age: NR

Short-foot exercise program

4 weeks

daily 100 reps

5 s contraction

 NR

 NR

NR

Dynamic balance

YBT reach distance of both legs in three directions, among which posterolateral with the right legd

  1. IG: intervention group, CG: control group, I: intervention, C: control, PIFM: plantar intrinsic foot muscles, MLA: medial longitudinal arch, ROM: range of motion, GRF: ground reaction force, CoP: center of pressure, AP: anteroposterior, CSA: cross-sectional area, US: ultrasound, YBT: Y-balance test, SEBT: star excursion balance test, NR: not reported.
  2. a,b,c,d: indicates the selected outcome measure when multiple measures were reported within the same outcome domain, based on the prioritization: relation with the role of the PIFMs (a), availability of data (b), statistical significance (c), and effect size (d). For example, indication ‘d’ means that several outcome measure were considered equally related to the role of the PIFMs, the data to determine the SMD was available for more than one of these measures and more than one was statistically significant, of which the measure with the largest effect size was selected for further analysis